JPhurst wrote:Except when they don't, like in the case of SciTechSCity, in which case opponents will say "You should just sell it to the highest bidder and give taxpayers relief!" (Not saying you fall into this category).

Not I. I think much of that is just using any excuse to harass Fulop. I tire of the cries of "high taxes" too, our tax rate is perfectly average for our area.

brewster wrote:It's really simple. Until we pass a law excluding funds from the sale of city assets from being used in the general budget, there will be an incentive to sell city assets to balance the budgets and make the current administration look good. This has been going on for decades.

Some years ago the Parking Authority was running in the red and sold a parking lot to balance it's budget. It's like the milkman selling his cow, right?

Except when they don't, like in the case of SciTechSCity, in which case opponents will say "You should just sell it to the highest bidder and give taxpayers relief!" (Not saying you fall into this category).

While personally, as a middle-aged, relatively sedate person, I appreciate "vest-pocket" parks for passive enjoyment, I'm not sure they bring the level of amenity to every neighborhood. Could there be a playground incorporated, to accommodate some, if not all of the neighbors? Better to control all the private parking which destroys planted front yards and street trees in front of rowhouses.

It's really simple. Until we pass a law excluding funds from the sale of city assets from being used in the general budget, there will be an incentive to sell city assets to balance the budgets and make the current administration look good. This has been going on for decades.

Some years ago the Parking Authority was running in the red and sold a parking lot to balance it's budget. It's like the milkman selling his cow, right?

The problem is that a GoFundMe shouldn't be necessary. "We" already own the land as the public. We shouldn't have to buy it from ourselves to prevent the city from selling everything to rich developers.

bricks wrote:A petition was just launched on Change.org opposing the city selling a wooded lot to a developer who will clear out the trees and build apartments. The city lacks green space and this is being done without the land going to public auction. This same developer already cleared out all of the trees at a lot just down the street from this, and over a year and a half later, that lot just sits blighted and overgrown with weeds.

A petition was just launched on Change.org opposing the city selling a wooded lot to a developer who will clear out the trees and build apartments. The city lacks green space and this is being done without the land going to public auction. This same developer already cleared out all of the trees at a lot just down the street from this, and over a year and a half later, that lot just sits blighted and overgrown with weeds.